Quality Education for Minorities (QEM) Network
Proposal Development Follow-up Workshop for the
National Science Foundation (NSF)’s Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program
Hilton Baltimore BWI Airport, 1739 West Nursery Road, Linthicum Heights, MD
July 8-9, 2016
NSF Award Guides and Program Information
Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program (NSF 16-559)
A Guide for Proposal Writing NSF 04-016
FastLane Electronic Proposal Submission
Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (NSF 16-1)
Proposal Forms Kit (NSF 00-3)
The 2002 User-Friendly Handbook for Project Evaluation (NSF 02-057)
Use of NSF’s FastLane/Research.gov for Submitting Proposals and Project Reports
Teacher Preparation (Major Publication/Articles)
American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Serving Learners. 2009. Innovation
and Reform in Teacher Preparation. Report from the AACTE’s 5th Annual Day on the Hill, June 17-18.
Boyd, Donald, Pamela Grossman, Hamilton Lankford, Susanna Loeb, and James Wyckoff. 2008.
Teacher Preparation and Student Achievement. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Committee on the Study of Teacher Preparation Programs in the United States. 2010. Preparing
Teachers: Building Evidence for Sound Policy. Executive Summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Constantine, Jill, Daniel Player, Tim Silva, Kristin Hallgren, Mary Grider, and John Deke. 2009.
An Evaluation of Teachers Trained Through Different Routes to Certification. Final Report.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Frank, Jennifer, and Nancy Shapiro. 2010. The Leadership Collaborative Retreat.Washington, DC:
Association of Public and Land-grant Universities.
Goldhaber, Dan, and Stephanie Liddle. 2012. The Gateway to the Profession: Assessing Teacher
Preparation Programs Based on Student Achievement. Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal
Data in Education Research and the American Institutes for Research.
Greenberg, Julie, and Kate Walsh. 2008. No Common Denominator: The Preparation of
Elementary Teachers in Mathematics by America’s Education School. Executive Summary. Washington, DC:
National Council on Teacher Quality.
Hakel, Milton, Judith Koenig, and Stuart Elliot. 2008. Assessing Accomplished Teaching:
Advanced-level Certification Programs. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Liston, Dan, Jennie Whitcomb, and Hilda Borko. 2009. The End of Education in Teacher Education: Thoughts on
Reclaiming the Role of Social Foundations in Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 107-111.
MacCallum, Dave, and Patti Ross. 2010. Minnesota Teacher Preparation Programs: A Component of the Teacher
Preparation Project Undertaken for the Minnesota Office in Higher Education. Minneapolis, MN: MacCallum Ross, Inc.
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. 2008. Making a Difference in Quality
Teaching and Student Achievement. Arlington, VA: National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. 2008. Measuring What Matters: The
Effects of National Board Certification on Advancing 21st Century Teaching and Learning. Arlington, VA:
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. http://www.nbpts.org/resources/publications.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education Blue Ribbon Panel on Clinical
Preparation and Partnerships for Improved Student Learning. 2010. Transforming Teacher Education Through
Clinical Practice: A National Strategy to Prepare Effective Teachers. Washington, DC: National Council for
Accreditation of Teacher Education.
National Research Council. 2010. Preparing Teachers: Building Evidence for Sound Policy. Committee on the study of teacher
reparation programs in the United States, Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Office of Educational Access and Success, the Center for 21st Century Universities, and the
Center for Advanced Communications Policy. 2012. A Review of State-level Programs to Enhance Postsecondary STEM
Education in the United States. Atlanta, GA: Office of Educational Access and Success.
Poliakoff, Ann, Caitlin Dailey, and Robin White. 2011. Pursuing Excellence in Teacher
Preparation: Evidence of Institutional Change from Teachers for a New Era Learning Network Universities. Washington, DC:
Academy for Educational Development.
Schmidt, William, Richard Houang, and Leland Cogan. 2011. Preparing Future Math Teachers. Science, 332, 1266-1267.
Stewart, Vivien. 2011. International Summit on the Teaching Profession. The Asia Society and the
U.S. Department of Education.
Tatto, Maria, John Schwille, Sharon Senk, Lawrence Ingvarson, Glenn Rowley, Ray Peck, Kiril Bankov, Michael Rodriguez,
and Mark Reckase. 2012. Policy, Practice, and Readiness to Teach Primary and Secondary Mathematics in 17 Countries:
Findings from the IEA Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics. Amsterdam, the Netherlands:
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
Teacher Recruitment and Retention
Alliance for Excellent Education, Tapping the Potential: Retaining and Developing High-Quality New Teachers.
Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Mervis, Jeffrey. 2010. Data Say Retention is Better Answer to “Shortage” than Recruitment. Science, 330, 580-581.
Rosas, Clarissa, and Mary West. 2011. Pre-service Teachers’ Perception and Beliefs of Readiness to Teach Mathematics.
Current Issues in Education, 14(1).
Berger, Beverly. 2011. “Preparing for Proposal Writing.” Presented at a Career Development
Workshop organized by the Caltech Postdoctoral Association, April 29, at the California Institute of Technology.
Hackett, Edward. n.d. “NSF Merit Review Profess and Research Proposal Preparation.”
Presented at NSF Day at the University of Texas at El Paso. http://nsf.utep.edu/sources/NSFpresentation.pdf.
Hazelrigg, George. 2010. “Competitive Proposal Writing.” Presented September 1, in Lincoln, Nebraska.
Hazelrigg, George. 2009. “Twelve Steps to a Winning Research Proposal.” Presented at the 2009
NSF CAREER Proposal Writing Workshop, March 12-13, at George Mason University in Arlington, VA.
National Science Foundation. 2013. Common Guidelines for Education Research and Development.
A report from the institute of education sciences, U.S. Department of Education and the
National Science Foundation (NSF 13-126)
National Science Foundation. n.d. “Data Management and Sharing Frequently Asked Questions.”
National Science Foundation. n.d. Merit Review Frequently Asked Questions. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
National Science Foundation. n.d. Proposal and Award Process. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
National Science Foundation. n.d. Revised NSF Merit Review Criteria: Effective for Proposals
Submitted or Due on or After January 14, 2013. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
National Science Foundation Directorate for Engineering. n.d. National Science Foundation
Directorate for Engineering. n.d. Sample Budget and Justification. Small Business Innovation Research
section of the National Science Foundation website.
National Science Foundation Division of Undergraduate Education. 2004. A Guide for Proposal
Writing (NSF 04-016). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
Campbell, Patricia, and Beatrice Clewell. 2008. Building Evaluation Capacity: Collecting and
Using Data in Cross-project Evaluations, Guide II. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
Frechtling, Joy, Melvin Mark, Debra, Rog, Veronica Thomas, Henry Frierson, Stafford Hood,
and Gerunda Hughes. 2010. The 2010 User-friendly Handbook for Project Evaluation. Arlington, VA:
National Science Foundation.
Program Development and Evaluation: Logic Models. University of Wisconsin-Extension.
W.K. Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development Guide.
Hansen, Michael. 2013. Characteristics of Schools Successful in STEM: Evidence from Two
States’ Longitudinal Data. Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in
Education Research and the American Institutes for Research.
National Research Council. 2011. Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. 2011. Expanding
Underrepresented Minority Participation: America's Science and Technology Talent at the Crossroads.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. 2010. Prepare and Inspire: K-12
Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) for America’s
Future. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President of the United States.
Common Core State Standards
Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU). 2011. The Common Core State Standards and Teacher
Preparation APLU/SMTI, Paper 2. Washington, DC: Association of Public and Land-grant Universities.
Conference Board of Mathematical Sciences. (2011). Common Standards and The Mathematical Education of Teachers.
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). 2012.
- Common Core State Standards: Implementation Tools and Resources.
- Common Core State Standards Initiative.
Online Instructional and Assessment Techniques Glossary
WebAssign is a flexible and fully customizable online instructional system that puts powerful tools in the hands of instructors, enabling them to create and deploy assignments, instantly assess individual student and whole class performance, and realize their teaching goals. Source: https://webassign.com/instructors/features/
Learning Catalytics allows faculty to obtain real-time responses to open-ended or critical thinking questions, determine which areas require further explanation, and then automatically group students for further discussion and problem solving. The system supports numerical, algebraic, textual, and graphical responses. The comprehensive and advanced analytics also help faculty better understand student performance in real time while lecturing.
WeBWorK is an open-source online homework system for mathematics and science courses. WeBWorK is supported by the Mathematical Association of America (MAA) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) and comes with a National Problem Library (NPL) of over 20,000 homework problems. Source: http://webwork.maa.org/intro.html
MyOpenMath is designed for mathematics, providing delivery of homework, quizzes, and tests with rich mathematical content. Students can receive immediate feedback on algorithmically generated questions with numerical or algebraic expression answers. It also provides a full course management system, including file posting, discussion forums, and a full gradebook, all designed with mathematics in mind. Source: https://www.myopenmath.com/info/classroom.php
MyLab & Mastering is a collection of online homework, tutorial, and assessment products designed to improve the results of all higher education students, one student at a time. It creates learning experiences that are personalized and continuously adaptive. MyLab & Mastering reacts to how students are actually performing, offering data-driven guidance that helps them better absorb course material and understand difficult concepts. Source: http://www.pearsonmylabandmastering.com/northamerica/
XYZ Homework provides online instructional tools for faculty and students by combining online assessment with MathTV.com video lessons and McKeague’s developmental mathematics textbooks to reinforce the concepts taught in the classroom. Randomized questions provide unlimited practice and instant feedback with all the benefits of automatic grading.
MyMathLab an online homework, tutorial and assessment tool for mathematics that offers two options for Adaptive Learning — The Adaptive Companion Study Plan and Personalized Homework. Instructors have the flexibility to incorporate the style and approach of adaptive learning that best suits their course structure and students’ needs.
Formative assessments monitor student learning during the learning process. The feedback gathered is used to identify areas where students are struggling so that instructors can adjust their teaching and students can adjust their studying. These are low-stakes assessments (i.e., they have low point values) that happen early and often in the semester.
Summative assessments are high-stakes assessments (i.e., they have high point values) that occur at the end of an instructional unit or course and measure the extent to which students have achieved the desired learning outcomes.
Other Workshop-related Resources
(Minority Males): White House. FACT SHEET & REPORT: Opportunity for All: My Brother’s Keeper Blueprint for Action